[Games] Status update

[Dmitry Marakasov]

* Richard Hartmann (richih.mailinglist at gmail.com) wrote:

> > git would definitely help with this approach: one feature per branch

> One feature per branch? Branches are cheap, but does this really
> make sense? On the other hand, people would be able to
> cherry-pick individual features by a simple local merge, then.
> And everyone else could use the patches-all (or whatever we call
> it) branch. It probably pays to just do it that way and see if we run
> into any troubles.

I think it can be either depending on people's needs.

If there's huge pack of changes (say 64bit fixes + gcc4 fixes +
dotdir support + something other), I guess it'll be useful for
everybody so should come as in a single branch (think as whole bunch
of changes was submitted and merged upstream).

If, however there is a reason someone only needs specific part of a
patchset, there's possibility someone other will need the same, so
it'll be wise to split patch into two or more.

But high granularity by default without real reason will just add
more work.

-- 
Dmitry Marakasov   .   55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56  9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D
amdmi3 at amdmi3.ru  ..:  jabber: amdmi3 at jabber.ru    http://www.amdmi3.ru